iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review • Hacker News Board

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#181

Post by endorphone » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 4:00 PM UTC

_coveredInBees wrote: post #174

endorphone wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As someone who owned the LG G3 years ago, and absolutely loved the wide-angle lens on that phone, most of these pictures would look identical" They wouldn't look remotely alike. Many of those simple shots are incredibly complex dynamic range scenes were the results are quite spectacular. With a lesser device the results would have been a blah photo, which is the point of the amazing progress that is happening in com…

I suggest you pick up an LG G3 and test it's capabilities out. It's not like HDR is some new invention that just came about in the smart phone space. It's been around forever. Yes, some of the algorithms have gotten better, and the HDR tonemapping has been improved, but I've taken thousands of HDR images with my G3 many years ago that looked great. Case in point - https://photos.app.goo.gl/RMMcJe9X6XjaEqcw7 > As to p…

I didn't say the G3 couldn't take good pictures. However saying "my G3 once took a good picture, therefore it's equivalent to this" isn't reasonable. Those are difficult scenes and unless you have a G3 to take a picture in the same lighting and conditions, your claim is baseless. Taking even current, top of the line smartphones and taking photos in perfectly equal conditions often yields significant differences in outcomes, yet you're seriously arguing that a five year old smartphone would be equal, with zero proof.

"Well, you're certainly very defensive for no apparent reason."

You stated that they wouldn't look good printed out which is a claim I didn't even want to argue (despite it being very wrong), instead pointing out that people generally don't print out often anyways, so... That isn't defensive, it's factual, as you say. No need to get defensive about it.

Feel free to get a G3 and an iPhone 11 and take comparable photos and show everyone, including the entire industry that recognizes the advances, how wrong they are -- it will surely see a lot of hits and attention.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#182

Post by sh-run » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 4:01 PM UTC

pwython wrote: post #161

sh-run wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have always questioned the usefulness of smaller sensor cameras (Ie M43) with the improvement in cellphone cameras, but it looks like I'll still carry my Olympus EM5.2 when I travel. The iPhone 11 gets great social media photos, but I wouldn't want to get any of those printed (at least not larger than 4x6). Of course the best camera is the one you have with you so I am still happy to see the improvements over…

M43 cameras are still relevant as the depth of field blur in these phone cameras is faked, sometimes with odd results. An f/1.8 aperture on most camera sensors translates to something like an f/8 full frame equivalent (for comparison, f/1.8 on M43 looks like f/3.6 on full frame). It still lets the same amount of light in, but there's no shallow depth/blur.

Yeah, there's also the benefits you get from longer exposures and the ability to swap lenses. I carry an Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 and Panasonic 100-300mm f/4-5.6, which gives me a massive focal length range to play with in a relatively small package.

For a hobbyist like me M43 is great and won't be replaced by a cell phone any time soon. And as much as I'd like an A7iii I can't justify the extra cost and lens size for what I do.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#183

Post by teilo » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 4:03 PM UTC

leesalminen wrote: post #90

scott_s wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you mean. I understand it to be a review by a professional photographer - but one with an obvious bias towards Apple, as they have been a client of his, he uses their phone's cameras in his work, and he has a book about how to take pictures with their phones. But that does not make it an advertisement, as far as I know, he is not paid by Apple, nor did Apple provide the phone or control what he said…

How did he get hands on a phone that hasn’t been released yet if Apple didn’t provide it?

A lot of prominent bloggers and tech news sites, including John Gruber, The Verge, and many others, got advance devices to review. This is normal, and not unique to Apple. They also get Pixels and Galaxies in advance.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#184

Post by zihotki » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 4:08 PM UTC

It would be interesting to see how it will score in DxOMark (the best unbiased source for comparing both mobile and standalone cameras) tests comparing to current top-players. This review feels biased.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#185

Post by delfinom » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 4:10 PM UTC

teilo wrote: post #183

leesalminen wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did he get hands on a phone that hasn’t been released yet if Apple didn’t provide it?

A lot of prominent bloggers and tech news sites, including John Gruber, The Verge, and many others, got advance devices to review. This is normal, and not unique to Apple. They also get Pixels and Galaxies in advance.

Unfortunately, alot early reviewers have perverse incentive to give good reviews to continue receiving early units and getting that as revenue first.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#186

Post by dpeck » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 4:13 PM UTC

graeme wrote: post #8

jonlucc wrote: post #4

The photography in these kinds of reviews is amazing, and the camera looks pretty stellar compared to the XS, but I find myself reading them wondering if it will make my pictures any better. I'm a mediocre photographer at best, and I'm certainly not going to be able to capture many images like the ones in this review.

John Gruber and Matthew Panzerino have good reviews in this respect. Very regular shots. Panzerino does year on year comparisons at Disneyland with his family. https://daringfireball.net/2019/09/the_iphone_11_and_iphones... https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/17/iphone-11-pro-disney-after...

that's a nice grift to have a recurring tax deductible Disney trip for the family each year.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#187

Post by m000 » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 4:16 PM UTC

mcphage wrote: post #168

m000 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, it's not an ad. It's an advertorial. Happy now? And he's just beating the strawman with his review. - Did we need a "review" to learn that the new iPhone can shoot better pictures than previous iPhones? - Where are all the full-resolution pictures–especially from the night shots? Everything looks nice and sharp if you scale it to 750x560. Even for the single lens camera of my 3 years-old android. - Would it break…

> Would it break Apple's heart to include a comparison of their "pro camera" with a real professional camera? Even a low-end one. Why would they? That's not who they're competing against.

Hell, photographers know that any iPhone can't compete a midrange camera.

But Apple clearly wants the average person to believe that it can. Why else stick a "pro" description to your phone's camera? Of course they can't spell it clearly, because they will become a laughing stock. But they do imply it at every opportunity: "Pro camera system. We’ve three‑upped ourselves.", review by professional photographer etc.

It would be fair game if they had a professional instagrammer review the new iPhone. Because that's the only kind of "professional" camerawork you can do with any phone.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#188

Post by mantoto » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 4:16 PM UTC

Super weird to read this text. I just came home from our first Japan trip and we both had a DSLR with us and three lenses. Heavy to carry around.

I expect 3-4k pictures from dslrs and 2k made by our smartphones. I'm really curious how our end result will look like.

I expect 100-300 images but this is our first holiday where we took considerable amounts of pictures/snapshots by phone.

At least on my Samsung s9 and my wives pixel 3a lots of those images look sharp.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#189

Post by ValentineC » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 4:25 PM UTC

nradov wrote: post #86

criddell wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel for all camera manufacturers. Why isn't there a Canon or Nikon or Sony cloud service where photos are sent to? Why haven't the big camera companies embraced computation in their cameras? Do DSLR bodies even have GPS capabilities for tagging photos? It feels like there's no innovation in the camera space outside of Apple and Google.

Very few DSLR bodies have GPS capability built in. This is kind of stupid because integrating a modern GNSS receiver would have only a trivial impact on size, weight, cost, and battery life. The odd thing is that GPS is somewhat common on much cheaper compact cameras. Some of DSLR manufacturers do offer fragile, awkward GPS accessories that you can plug in externally. And they generally provide some sort of geo-taggi…

> So the ideal solution would probably be for the camera to obtain location data from the phone via Bluetooth.

My Olympus E-M10 (bought in 2014, and still going strong) does this with a companion phone app, and it's incredibly useful.

Re: iPhone 11 Pro Camera Review

#190

Post by TeMPOraL » Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 4:37 PM UTC

la_barba wrote: post #172

Gene_Parmesan wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, there can be a big power discrepancy in cases where free product is provided for review purposes. It's different if you are part of a traditional media outfit and have a significant, steady readership. But for someone like this, there can be a lot of pressure to give very favorable write-ups. Second, this wouldn't be the first time someone did a paid promotion without noting it was paid. I don't know anything…

Whats the point of muddying the waters without having verifiable facts? The thing with speculation is .. anyone can speculate, on anything, for any reason. That doesn't make it true. >I'm just saying it's naive to think that everyone is always highly committed to playing nice with the FTC rules. Who exactly said that?

Look at the quote at the beginning of this thread.

If it looks like an ad, if it reads unnaturally, like something no real person would say to convey a honest opinion, then it's most likely an ad.